Europe’s new nuclear plants hit more snags

Plans for two new nuclear plants in Western Europe have met more setbacks in the last week, risking the industry’s future here.

Two new nuclear plants, one in Finland and the other in France, which for years have been limping towards start-up, have just encountered further problems, with worrying wider implications for the nuclear industry.

They are two almost completed prototype European Pressurised Water reactors (EPRs), already years late and massively over budget, whose new problems are causing further expensive delays.

EDF has just begun building two more EPR reactors in the UK and has
plans to add another two, but there must be doubts whether this scheme
is now credible. Since the stations were planned a decade ago wind and
solar power have now both become far cheaper than nuclear, even without
what seem to be its inevitable cost overruns.

Ten years late

The first EPR, Olkiluoto 3 in Finland,
was due to be up and running in 2009, but concerns about the quality of
construction and legal disputes caused a series of cost escalations and
delays. This had already meant the postponement of the first grid
connection until October 2018, and the growth of the plant’s cost to
more than three times the original estimate of €3 billion (£2.6 bn).

While this recommendation is not binding on the regulator it will be
hard to ignore, and it is doubtful that ASN would allow EDF to go ahead
and start the reactor with faulty welds. It has said it will make a decision in June.

Threefold price rise

Since the pipes containing the welds are fundamental to the operation
of the reactor, and repairing them would take up to two years, this can
only add further to the escalating costs.

The single reactor was due to open in 2012 and cost €3 bn, but is
already estimated to cost €10.9 bn and to start in mid-2020, although
the new weld problem could delay the start for another two years.

This, on top of earlier doubts about safety caused by there being too
much carbon in the steel pressure vessel, has made the French
government postpone any plans to build any more EPRs at home. Instead,
for the first time, it is encouraging heavy investment in renewable
energy.

“The site is … on a vulnerable
coast and will need massive sea defences to protect the reactors from
the expected sea level rise of up to two metres in their planned
lifetime”

It has a guarantee from the UK government for a price for electricity
from the station which is twice the current market tariff in Britain.
That makes building the station a money-spinner for EDF − and will push
up consumer bills.

This is, of course, if the twin reactors each producing 1,600
megawatts, about 7% of the UK’s electricity needs, enough for six
million homes, can indeed be built on time and on budget by 2025. They
will rapidly become white elephants if they reach anything like the
10-year delay that the reactors in Finland and France seem destined to
achieve.

Currently thousands of workers are already employed at Hinkley Point
and so far everything seems to be going to plan, with EDF claiming
25,000 people will soon be working on the project.

The site is also on a vulnerable coast and will need massive sea
defences to protect the reactors from the expected sea level rise of up
to two metres in their planned lifetime.

Avoiding another Hinkley

A way of financing them has yet to be agreed with the UK government,
which has been stung by the criticism of the excessive prices promised
for Hinkley Point’s output and has decided not to repeat its mistake.

As part of its strategy to bolster the company’s finances EDF has
gone into partnership with the Chinese state nuclear companies which are
part-funding both projects. Ultimately the Chinese and French hope to build yet another reactor at Bradwell in Essex, east of London, this time of Chinese design. But that seems even further away on the horizon.

The success or failure of EDF’s plans is crucial to the future of
nuclear power in Western Europe. Japan, the US and all other western
European states apart from France have given up the idea of building
large stations. Only China and Russia are now building 1,000 megawatt
stations and offering generous terms to any country in the world that
will allow them to be built on their soil.

In both cases cost seems secondary to gaining influence in the
countries concerned, which will be dependent on either Russia or China
for nuclear supplies for a generation or longer if they are to keep the
lights on.